zn said:
DR RAM said:
zn said:
zn
07/02/2012 01:34 PM
kf said:
Bradford should do better because of the west coast system,
Well, just to be clear...it's not a WCO.
I know some players say it's like a WCO but that's just loose talk.
It's a Coryell system. Brian the S learned it from Cam Cameron when he (Brian) was the qb coach for SD and Cameron was the coordinator.
Like all offensive systems, the Coryell system has many faces. Cameron is in the more conservative tradition of the Coryell offense that goes back to Joe Gibbs, among others. Another example of the conservative version is the 90s Cowboys, when Norv Turner was the coordinator.
Cameron learned the offense from Norv Turner when he was with Turner in Washington from 94-96 (by the way guess who replaced Cameron when Cam went on to become the head coach at IU? That's right, Mike Martz.) Turner learned the system from Ken Zampese with the Rams under John Robinson. Zampese learned it from Coryell. Right now, Cameron is the coordinator for the Ravens.
Now why did the players erroneously say it is a WCO.
Because Fisher and Brian the S came in this year and watched film of 2010. They then copied a lot of stuff from that year and built it into the playbook. So players recognize a lot of concepts from 2010.
Which, again, doesn't make it a WCO. What it IS is a conservative version of the Coryell offense with a lot of plays borrowed from Shurmur's 2010 offense. Fisher has said that he liked how the 2010 Rams offense handled Bradford and set him up to do well. (Coaches as a rule admired that offense more than many fans did.)
However, I don't think Brian S will be as conservative as the 2010 offense was. If I had to predict in advance, I would say that there will be more medium range passing under Brian S. Besides, a lot of the conservatism in 2010 was due to circumstances. They had no WRs outside of Mr. Short Pass, Dannydola. Jackson was hobbled all year and they couldn't run effectively. Bradford was a rookie obviously. So I think it will remind us of 2010 but it will also be different in a lot of ways.
...
I certainly had no problem with the offense, my problem was with the play calling.
Too simple, but...
WCO = lateral
Coryell = vertical
To be clear, I had no problem with the playcalling. In fact, I thought it was very smart. But then I didn't measure the offense simply by the length of the passes. The play design is what worked for me. The conservatism had nothing to do with the system. It was a response to having a line with 2 young tackles, a rookie qb, no receivers, and a hobbled Jackson.
And there are lateral Coryell offenses and vertical WCOs.
I know you had no problem with it.
I specifically had a problem with the way we played when we had a lead.
I admired how Shurmer protected Sam with the limitations involved, but the conservatism, your word, is what I had a problem with in the second half of most games. And if it wasn't conservatism, then it was adjustments that were not made or countered. THAT was my problem, and it cost the Rams wins, IMO.
The lateral and vertical is the main theory difference between the two offenses. There is EVERY type of offense in the NFL.
I see you changed it to conservative. Yes, of course, there are thousands of variations and they constantly evolve. A Coryell offense can certainly be conservative if the OC, or HC are conservative, but the concepts, route trees, and verbage are likely the same.